Case sent back to organisation (130,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Case sent back to organisation
Total judgments found: 168
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
Judgment 3738
123rd Session, 2017
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to reject his claim for a termination indemnity.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; terminal entitlements;
Consideration 11
Extract:
[T]he impugned decision of 24 March 2014 wrongly rejected the claim for retrospective payment of a termination indemnity and compensation for moral injury submitted by the complainant on 18 February 2014 on the grounds that it was time-barred, whereas the Secretary-General should have considered its substance. Accordingly, that decision must be set aside and the case remitted to the ITU for a new decision on the merits of the claim to be taken within 30 days from the public delivery of this judgment.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3737
123rd Session, 2017
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant alleges that he was subjected to harassment.
Consideration 13
Extract:
The case will be remitted to the ITU for a full and proper examination of the initial internal complaint lodged by the complainant [...] under the terms envisaged by Service Order No. 05/05, as should originally have been the case. Indeed, contrary to what the complainant suggests in his submissions, the Tribunal cannot rule at this stage on the merits of the allegations made in that complaint since most of them have not been subject to the prior investigations necessary to make an informed assessment, which the ITU’s internal bodies alone are able to conduct effectively. The ITU must therefore, within 30 days of the public delivery of this judgment, set up a new commission of inquiry to investigate the said internal complaint.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; harassment;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; harassment; late appeal;
Judgment 3732
123rd Session, 2017
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss his allegations of harassment and abuse of authority as unfounded.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; harassment;
Consideration 7
Extract:
The two flaws identified [...] warrant remitting the matter back to the UPU so that the competent authority may take a new decision upon recommendation of a new, properly composed [Joint Appeals Committee].
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3695
122nd Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the EPO’s rejection of his two internal appeals against the Ombudsman’s failure to follow the formal procedure in respect of his harassment complaint and against the President’s decision to reject that harassment complaint.
Considerations 9-11
Extract:
The IAC’s report of 2 August 2011 appears to be the product of a balanced, rational and thoughtful consideration of the evidence and arguments advanced by the parties in the internal appeals. In the final express decision of 11 October 2012 (communicated by the Vice-President of Directorate General 4), the reasoning of the President as regards internal appeal RI/35/10 was that “in view of the fact that the investigation of [the complainant’s] complaint from 2008 [could] not be repeated, taking into account the ongoing efforts to find a balanced and global solution to [his] different requests and grievances, [the President had decided] to reject this appeal as well and refrain from any payments”. An executive head of an organisation has a duty to substantiate a final decision departing from the recommendations of an appeal committee (see, for example, Judgments 2339, consideration 5, 2699, consideration 24, and 3208, consideration 11). The reasons of the President singularly fail to come to grips with the reasoning of the IAC and fail to explain, in any satisfactory and persuasive way, why the recommendations of the IAC, whether the majority or the minority, should be rejected. For this reason alone the impugned decision rejecting the complainant’s appeal in internal appeal RI/35/10 should be set aside. The complainant is entitled to costs.
The complainant does not come to grips with the reasoning of the IAC and the argument of the EPO in these proceedings that the issue raised in his internal appeal RI/145/09 is moot. This appears to be correct and nothing further need be said.
Whether and, if so, to what extent, the Tribunal’s decision in Judgment 3337 has a bearing on any final decision the President might make in relation to internal appeal RI/35/10 is initially a matter for the President presumably acting on legal advice. However, the Tribunal does note that the subject matter of that judgment concerned events and issues which, at most, overlap in a limited way with events and issues raised in internal appeal RI/35/10.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2339, 2699, 3208
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; harassment;
Judgment 3694
122nd Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to reject his appeal against the new Internal Instructions on the patent granting procedure, contending inter alia that the Appeals Committee was improperly composed.
Consideration 6
Extract:
The Tribunal notes that none of the cases cited by the Appeals Committee dealt with the composition of an internal appeal body. It also observes that considering the quasi-judicial functions of the Appeals Committee, its composition is fundamental and changing it changes the body itself. While it is true that the fundamental functions of that body must not be paralysed, it is also true that the body itself cannot be changed through a changed composition. The balance sought to be achieved by the composition of this body, which includes members appointed by the Administration and the staff representation, is a fundamental guarantee of its impartiality. That balanced composition is an essential feature underpinning its existence. Without it, it is not the Appeals Committee. The case will therefore be sent back to the EPO so that the Appeals Committee, composed in accordance with the applicable rules, may examine the appeal.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; internal appeals body;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; internal appeals body;
Judgment 3683
122nd Session, 2016
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his temporary appointment beyond its expiry date.
Considerations 1-3
Extract:
[T]he complainant disputed the grounds for the decision [...] not to extend his temporary appointment beyond its expiry date. In so doing, he must be considered to have initiated an internal appeal. However, no action was ever taken on his appeal.
Under Staff Rule 1230.8.1, an action becomes final only when the staff member has received written notification thereof. Given that the [...] appeal was filed, the final action for the purposes of this provision would be the decision to dismiss the appeal, but in this case written notification was not received because [...] no such decision was ever taken. Accordingly, the time limit for an appeal to the RBA never began to run and the RBA was wrong to consider that the appeal filed with it on 17 February 2010 was irrecevable.
The decision of 17 September 2012 must hence be set aside and the case remitted to WHO for the appeal of 17 February 2010 to be examined on the merits by the RBA.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3668
122nd Session, 2016
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to award him the disability-related compensation foreseen by Appendix D to UNIDO Staff Rules.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; final decision; illness; service-incurred;
Judgment 3637
122nd Session, 2016
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant has filed a second application for execution of Judgment 2551.
Consideration 4
Extract:
The case will be remitted to the ITU for the complainant to be paid the sums due to her in connection with her health condition on the basis of the Medical Board's report [...].
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2551
Keywords:
application for execution; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed;
Judgment 3635
122nd Session, 2016
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants have filed applications for execution of Judgment 3238.
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3238
Keywords:
application for execution; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; joinder;
Considerations 7-8
Extract:
[T]he CDE refused to pay the sums specifically corresponding to social security contributions because, in its opinion, that would breach the terms of its Headquarters Agreement with Belgium.
The Centre contends that, as regards staff members who in this matter are covered by the "Belgian system", which is the case of all the complainants, under article 20 of the Headquarters Agreement it is bound to "apply Belgian social security legislation", which requires such contributions to be paid by the NSSO.
The CDE therefore paid the amounts corresponding to the contributions in question to the NSSO, as a document in the file establishes.
However, the Tribunal finds that in so doing, the CDE breached its duty to execute Judgment 3238 in full.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3238
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3616
121st Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend her fixed-term contract and the refusal to grant her a termination indemnity.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; terminal entitlements;
Judgment 3602
121st Session, 2016
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former employee of the WTO, contests the Director-General’s decision to summarily dismiss him for serious misconduct.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; misconduct; summary dismissal;
Considerations 25 and 27
Extract:
The Tribunal considers that in the particular circumstances the WTO had a duty of care towards the complainant that went beyond the mere statement that he had not established that his illness was responsible for his behaviour. That duty required the WTO to seek further medical advice concerning the complainant's medical condition that would have assisted it to have made a more informed assessment of a causal connection and consequential decision in the matter. This assessment should also have been weighed in determining proportionality. Having not done so, the impugned decision was unlawful [.]
[...]
[T]he impugned decision must be set aside to the extent that it found that summary dismissal was a proportionate sanction. The matter will be remitted to the WTO for reconsideration.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; disciplinary measure; medical fitness; proportionality;
Judgment 3592
121st Session, 2016
International Olive Oil Council
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, whose letter of resignation has not been formally accepted, challenges the decision of the Executive Director of the IOOC requiring him, inter alia, to vacate his office.
Consideration 4
Extract:
When a complaint is filed against an implied decision of rejection, the Tribunal may either rule on the merits of the case brought to it, or remit the case to the organisation.
The former solution would be tantamount to unduly depriving the complainant of his right to an internal appeal, which is an additional safeguard to that which judicial protection offers the staff members of international organisations which have recognised the Tribunal's jurisdiction ( see in particular Judgments 2781, under 15, and 3067, under 20 ). The Tribunal will not therefore rule on the merits and the case will be remitted to the IOOC, which must submit the appeal that has not been considered to its competent bodies.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2781, 3067
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; procedure before the tribunal; resignation;
Judgment 3570
121st Session, 2016
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to end his service on grounds of invalidity and requests his reinstatement.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint dismissed; invalidity; medical examination; reinstatement;
Judgment 3566
121st Session, 2016
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant filed an application for execution of Judgment 3239.
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3239
Keywords:
application for execution; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed;
Considerations 17-22
Extract:
"[C]ontrary to what the CDE appears to believe, it cannot legitimately cite the need to submit its every expense to its Executive Board for approval to exonerate it from its duty to execute the judgment in question promptly.
International organisations that have recognised the Tribunal’s jurisdiction are bound to take whatever action a judgment may require and, in particular, should the Tribunal order payment of a sum of money, to effect this payment without delay (see, inter alia, Judgment 82, under 5, and aforementioned Judgment 3152, under 11). It would be a serious breach of the CDE’s obligations if the execution of such an order were rendered contingent on the Executive Board’s approval, with the inevitable corollary that, should the Board refuse, the CDE would consider itself released from the obligation under which it is placed, or if the execution of the order were simply delayed pending a meeting of the Board, even if the Board’s approval were merely a formality.
However, the Tribunal notes that the CDE’s lack of celerity has not had any practical implications for the complainant. In fact, the conduct of the complainant, who, as mentioned above, refused to submit certain information and documents that were necessary for payment of the sum owed to her, in any case prevented the judgment from being executed more rapidly.
Furthermore, it is clear from the file that the CDE has already endeavoured to pay the greater part of the award against it, despite its major financial difficulties.
In these conditions, and considering the parties’ shared responsibility, explained above, for the errors in the interpretation of Judgment 3239 from which this dispute arises, the Tribunal finds there is no reason to award the amounts claimed by the complainant by way of interest for delay, compensation for moral injury and costs.
In the circumstances of the case, neither is it appropriate to order that the obligation to execute the judgment in question be accompanied by a penalty for default.
The complainant will be required to provide to the CDE without delay, as the CDE rightly requests, the information and supporting documents necessary to determine her entitlement to dependent child allowances, education allowances and coverage of home leave expenses."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 82, 3152
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; execution of judgment;
Judgment 3539
120th Session, 2015
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the EPO’s decision to reject his requests for childcare allowances.
Consideration 12
Extract:
It is not for the Tribunal to decide whether a particular facility should be recognised for the purpose of the childcare allowance in the Regulations. Accordingly, the matter will be remitted to the EPO for a reconsideration of the complainant's claims for the childcare allowance. Before taking a decision on the complainant's requests, the criteria or framework against which his requests will be considered shall be communicated to the complainant and [he] shall be given a reasonable opportunity to submit evidence in support of his requests.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3505
120th Session, 2015
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend her sick leave entitlement beyond the date on which her appointment expired.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint dismissed; failure to exhaust internal remedies; separation from service; sick leave;
Consideration 14
Extract:
[T]je complaint must be dismissed as irrecevable because internal means of redress have not been exhausted, as required by Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal. The matter shall be remitted to UNESCO in order that the Appeals Board may give an opinion on the two appeals submitted to it by the complainant, after taking such steps as may be necessary to ensure that the procedure has been duly followed.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3503
120th Session, 2015
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the lawfulness of the appointment of two staff members to grade G-6 posts.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
appointment; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; right of appeal; vacancy;
Considerations 7-9
Extract:
[I]t should be recalled that, for a letter addressed to an organization to constitute an appeal, it is sufficient that the person concerned clearly expresses therein his or her intention to contest the decision adversely affecting her or him and that the request thus formulated can be granted in some meaningful way (see Judgments 3068, under 16, and 3127, under 8, and the case law cited therein).
Whileit is true that the applicable provisions in this case required that the request for review be substantited, the complainant, who clearly indicated the grounds for her challenge, did in fact meet that obligation.
The foregoing considerations lead the Tribunal to find that the impugned decision was unlawful and to note that the complainant has, in this case, been unlawfully denied the benefit of her right to an internal appeal, a safeguard which international civil servants enjoy in addition to their right of appeal to a judicial authority (on this point, see for example Judgments 2781, under 15, and 3068, under 20).
The Tribunal will therefore remit the case to WIPO in order that the Director General take a decision on the merits of the complainant's request for review pursuant to Staff Rule 11.1.1.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2781, 3068, 3068, 3127
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; internal appeal;
Judgment 3497
120th Session, 2015
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the refusal of her request that her mother’s condition be recognized as a serious illness.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; health insurance; illness; medical expenses; medical opinion;
Consideration 18
Extract:
"Since, as the Tribunal has consistently held, it is not competent to rule on medical matters, the case must be remitted to the Organisation so that a new decision can be taken in light of an opinion given by the competent body with the safeguards of complete impartiality and transparency."
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation;
Judgment 3425
119th Session, 2015
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: After his contract was terminated, the complainant successfully challenges the rejection of his appeal, for lack of formal notification.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; internal appeal; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 3424
119th Session, 2015
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The Tribunal found that the impugned implied decision was flawed.
Consideration 11
Extract:
"When it transpires that the internal appeal procedure in force in an international organisation has not been followed properly, the Tribunal often decides – in some instances on its own initiative – to remit the case to the organisation, in order that the competent appeal bodies can hear it, rather than to examine its merits (see, for example, Judgments 1007, 2341, 2530, 2781 or 3067)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1007, 2341, 2530, 2781, 3067
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; internal appeal;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; internal appeal;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
|
